starwars_exodusfandomcom-20200216-history
Talk:Lone Scout-A
Why did you change the picture when we're using that same ship for the TIE Lone Scout A-2? If you check the wiki article, you can see the first picture matches the drawing of the Lone Scout-A a lot better. The more boxy frame I used for the A-2. --Halomek 18:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC) *Because he's the CEO of SFS, and as such, he can give it whatever visual representation he wants? ;) :P --Cadden Blackthorne 18:11, 26 October 2006 (UTC) *I've reverted back to Raith's edit. You can review my reasons over PM, Halomek. --Cadden Blackthorne 18:33, 26 October 2006 (UTC) *Canon (starwars.com) listed the pic I replaced yours with as the official and I prefer official over CGI when possible.--CEORaithSienar 18:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC) **Besides, this image is just a bad CGI job. The schematic on the Wookieepedia article looks a lot better, and I'd rather trust something like that than a botched-up fan-made CGI variant, just because someone doesn't like a "boxy" TIE starfighter. --Cadden Blackthorne 19:57, 26 October 2006 (UTC) *That's a matter of opinion. I think it added a better visual distinction than having two pics of the same fighter for both models. I still say the first fit the schematic better than the second, but whatever... I can see I'm in the minority on this so I'll let it go. --Halomek 21:07, 26 October 2006 (UTC) **If you look at the Wookieepedia article's description a little closer, however, you can see that they are the same models, but with different stats. Their equipment is different, but their outward appearance is the same. The A-2 is merely the same type of craft, with a different configuration. It's like putting shields on the TIE Interceptor. It's still the TIE Interceptor, but with a shield generator. Something you won't see by looking at its hull. --Cadden Blackthorne 21:27, 26 October 2006 (UTC) ***All I see is "variant" which can mean anything. Nowhere does it state conclusively that the models are exactly the same. The improved deep scan sensor array and hyperdrive backup could take up more room, which is why I went with the more boxy version for the A-2. Using the boxy version for the A-2 also fits better with the very first rendered picture of the Scout as seen in the Decipher CCG (which was an A-2). --Halomek 21:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC) ****Funny, I don't see anywhere on that card anything about an A-2 model. Also, according to the article, and I quote: :::"It had an improved deep scan sensor array and a more capable backup hyperdrive (Class Twelve, instead of the Lone Scout-A's Class Fifteen backup drive), '''at the cost of 25 tons of cargo space.'"'' :::Hmm... so, they shelled out 25 tons of cargo space so they could fit these improvements into the ship. Of course it takes up more room... hence why they lessened the cargo space available on the craft. :::It's the same type of ship, visually speaking. Wookieepedia clearly states that they traded cargo space for improvements. --Cadden Blackthorne 22:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC) ****Also, to note, I'm looking through that database you're relying on, Halomek... and I must say, some of this is pure fanon. There never was a TIE Heavy Bomber. The TIE Raptor never seemed to be in droid variant (and the name "Zsinj Development Incorporated" is purely fanon). They neglect to mention that the reason why the TIE Hunter was never fully realized in the Imperial fleet was because Rogue Squadron used them to blow up an ISD, and the Empire didn't want to admit that the Rebels' technology was better than their own (to their credit, they got close, but the way they describe it just isn't as accurate as it can be). They call the TIE Avenger the TIE Advanced. And... what the hell is a TIE Star Cruiser? And since when was the Nssis-class Clawcraft a SFS design? So they look like a fancy TIE, doesn't mean that SFS made them. :::I'm sorry, but I'm just not going to take things from this site at face-value. It's nice if no contradictive stats or info exist... but... y'know... some I just have to raise an eyebrow to. --Cadden Blackthorne 22:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC) *Easy there, Cadden. I believe I said a few posts back that I was letting it go. All I've been doing since then is explaining my reasons. I've never relied exclusively on that site for my info. I know some of what they got up there is fanon. :As far as the card... The A-2 model was used to scout the Dantooine base to see if Leia was telling the truth on the Death Star. Decipher's TIE Scout card came out when they were only doing cards from A New Hope, therefore that is an A-2 in the picture. It may not be labeled as such, but it's clearly what they intended. :Now, I did notice the reduced cargo space but I was also making connections visually. The sloped hull on the Wookieepedia picture still looks (to me) more like the picture I put up than the game version. It wouldn't be the first time a starfighter hull was modified slightly for improvements. My thoughts were that maybe they had to expand it even with reduced cargo space. :I really don't care that much about this though. I've moved on. The only reason I'm still posting on this is to try and let you know what I was thinking when I first made the entry. --Halomek 23:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC) **Heh, sorry for misleading you... I was ranting about the site, not about you relying on it. My apologies for not being clear about that. I was picking inconsistencies to show that their image might just be incorrect, and then I started seeing all this other stuff, and I'm like, "wtf?". So... yeah. ::And not to continue to argue in order to sound like an ass... but I'd like to point out that A-2 did, indeed derive from the standard (duh, I know :P). That said, I'd just like to point out that, I looked at the card's description again, and it doesn't mention any connection to the A-2's mission profile. Yes, the A-2 was around in the ANH timeframe. However, seeing as it's a variant, and not a replacement, to the original, then it's safe to say the original was also around still. ::That's all I gotta say. I'm not saying you weren't thinking or anything, Halomek... I'm just saying that it can easily be credible that the original design is still boxed, especially since Wookieepedia's article lists the specs for the original craft, and the picture above their stats box being "Lone Scout-A". It's not absolute, no, but I also believe that, knowing Wookieepedia, if there was a different hull shape, they probably would have said so. --Cadden Blackthorne 23:20, 26 October 2006 (UTC) :::Oh, for crying out loud...the MBT is fanon too. We can just say that the A-2 looks slightly different from the A on the MBT and be done with it. We don't follow canon half the time anyway. --Jagtai 05:05, 27 October 2006 (UTC) ::::Wait, what's this "we don't follow canon half the time" business? I make it a point to follow RotJ-and-sooner canon as much as I can. :P ::::On another note, evidently Firefox displays these bullets a hell of a lot differently than IE. Odd. --Cadden Blackthorne 05:17, 27 October 2006 (UTC) Moved Despite the fact that the Lone Scout-A uses twin ion engine tech, it's not listed as a TIE according to canon. Check Wookieepedia to verify it. That being the case, I'm taking the TIE designation off of this article. --Halomek 21:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)